It's a good thing there is again violence in Genoa

Isn't it great to see all this violence, to see all these news reports that tell of dramatic events? Media tend to jump on this and anti-globalist demonstrators should thank them for that. It keeps away the attention from other things, such as the fact that demonstrators have nothing to say, are largely uninformed and do not speak with a unified voice. If the violence would be absent, so would be any impact of the demonstrations. Even the 'non-violent' protestors should be thankful for every wall climbed, every car burned and every random window smashed: as long as this continues, nobody norices the emptiness of their arguments.

you are either a rich capitalist pig or a brain washed idiot.

no, I don't think that violence is godd because therefor people have no idea about the alternatives that are raised by many protesters! Because there are arguments and alternatives and they are raised at every counter-summit. Many of the protesters live this alternatives already to a major point others don't. And the unified voice is seen by me as diversity, diversity of many different people and diversity of life. the G8 policy is doing an unification of consumers but separation from the poor and the people that want a free life and not a manipulated by mass-media and consumption, advertissments and the policy of governments. A bad thing for me is that violence is necessary to get the voice heard and that this violence is used in an inadequate way. my ideal view is non-violent but I can't talk for the protesters. It is also sure that there are protesters that are living in the way that they demand it from the G8 and that don't know real alternatives, but these is not to prevent and a consequence of our society were you are not asked a real own opinion.

All of us, the largely uninformed, whether in Genoa or around the world, are thankful to You great Blixior, for being informed enough for the whole of humanity. Despite Your disapproval however the lack of a unified voice is considered by a lot of us a strength rather than a disadvantage...
As soon as we know the identity of the murdered protester you might consider informing his loved ones of your considered opinion. I'm sure they'd appreciate your morcels of wisdom.

mihalis

double shit

Get a hobby, Blixior. Either that, or get a better job. I can't imagine agent-provocateur is that spiritually fulfilling.

Tinkerpunk

Gary, thanks for your comment. Obviously, there was much irony to be detected in my statement. No, I don't think violence is a good thing. I consider myself to in line with many anti-globalization protestors as far as some of the arguments go. As such, I find it a shame that often people are speaking but are at the same time given a reason not to be heard. Sure, this world should change, and yes there is strength in diversity too. But I for one would be less than receptive to someone using violence or calling me a 'pig' or 'idiot'. If violence and disrespect is the alternative to, and I agree fully, ignorant world leaders that fail to listen, I am far from convinced. If what is being told strikes you as wrong, provide an alternative, but make sure you are being heard. I don't think fighting empty words with glaring violence or more harshbut equally empty words can be a solution.

And no, mihalis, I did not pretend to be the know it all that the world has been waiting for. Reading that into my message shows a determined interpretation of people's opionions. We might all be different, we might be diverse, but I don't think it's far fetched that everybody deserves some respect for their opinion and is listened to. That should be a great alternative to start with.

A thought from a couple of anarchists in the U.S. We understand the strategic benefits and necessity of militant confrontation with the State. However, following the Genoa protests as well as similar events throughout Europe can only sadden us. One, yes the protest leadership of the liberal bloc will sell out any revolutionary leaps that the mass of protesters make, especially those who are not anarchists but are sympathetic to anarchist theories and strategies. However, whatever frustrations some anarchists may have need to be better theoretically and strategically focused. This means thinking more about rhetorical/public impacts of violent confrontation and public statements. Just as one example, tell us why some anarchists can't entertain non-violent militant action along with strategically placed violent confrontation? One of the things that makes anarchism strong is that it rejects Marxist objective conditions talk. However, it shouldn't be ruined by the cult of atavistic historical actor-dom. This is just one example of a huge problem.

We know these things are hotly debated here and around the world among all kinds of anarchists as they have been for well over a century. Unfortunately, recent events do not bode well for Washington D.C. and the future possibilities of a truly mass anarchist movement.

You description of events is inacurrate of the reality of the protesters knowledge of the countries of the G8. You also write in a very negative manner and I hope you take time to trawl through the site to see the information that is available from 'ignorant' activists. Also breifly I would like to add I wish for you to take the same scepticism of those who are having the meetings.

Alors, comme cela, les manifestants n'ont rien à dire, ne privilégient que la violence dite aveugle. Autrement dit, tous les camarades qui se font tabasser, infiltrer par les flics "européens" ne sont que des abrutis mentaux, bon à se faire shooter par balles?

Pourquoi Gènes alors? Parce que comme le pense le cher Blixior, les anti-globalisations ont plus de motivations intellectuelles d'extrême-droite (fachos), et qu'ils ont le mérite d'être conscient des injustices qui sont le fait du néolibéralise, et qu'entre autre, ils ont bien réellement un autre monde à proposer : exemple de l'anarchisme, que le cher Blixior ferait mieux de lire avec plus d'intensité.

Le probléme, étant anarchiste moi-même, et n'étant pas sur place (j'écris de mon "sweet home"), je suis pour l'abolition (comprenait annihilation) de ce "G8", et donc pour la violence de cette répression à la solde des néolibéralistes que l'on sait tous pourris (d'ailleurs, de préciser que Chirac est poursuivi par la justice française).


Là où je ne comprends pas, c'est les actes "terroristes", qui ont pour but de pourrir le sommet.
Ainsi les colis "kindly" exposifs sont le fait de la stratégie de l'extrême-droite italienne dans les années 70, et reconnues par la justice italienne.
D'autre part, il est surprenant que le black block participe à l'arrestation de manifestants avec tous les émois amoureux de la police italienne.

Résultat, le Berlusconi (c'est affreux, j'ai osé mettre une majuscule) a réussi le but de transformer un sommet anti-globalisation en un sommet violent.

Ce qui l'a servi:

_les flics infiltrés dans les blacks blocks
_une présence policiaire quasiment sur le pied de guerre, et dont le niveau intellectuel ne dépasse pas celui d'une machine (pas de combattants rêvés pour les faschos)
_une administration zélée et arbitraire qui décide du droit de passage des manifestants: ainsi, dans les 686 cas refoulés au 18 juillet, bon nombre n'avait pas d'antécédant judiciaire!
_De savoir que des gens non représentatifs de la société, qui sont les pantins des multinationnales prétendent imposer leur monde à l'avenir, gigantesque hypocrisie (du jamais vu dans l'histoire de l'humanité) incite à la rebellion...

Donc vive la révolution!

Zapata vive, la lucha sigue!

I can assure you that I took the time to gather information on some of the arguments, from both sides of the fence. I take the same cynical approach to both sides and indeed I do not know for sure whether it's better to speak in empty words or to diminish the strength of the spoken words by backing them up with violence or insults. I am aware of the fact that bonafide organizations such as Medecins Sans Frontiere are present and DO have interesting, debatable and informed things to say. As do some of the people on this site. I hope you can agree with me that a majority of protestors do not, that their violence is largely unfocused and senseless. I say: make it hard on the G8, don't make it easy. I'm afraid that's what a lot of people are doing: allowing themselves to be put in a position where no right-minded person should listen to them.

Hiring a blind ass-hole like Blix, is cheap marginal shit for the corps. - in ANY capacity! He like the others, will be executed by toxic environmental assaults, at the proper time! -And no doubt go to his death loaded with disinformation - from others like him - of how hard Mr. Bush - the corporate Drug Giants, and the BioTech medical corp. - tried to save him!
If he enters a class action, with others similarily victimized, he will see first-hand, the courts uncanny ability to through out any cases that affect corporate profitability - under the general rubic of "not conclusively proved"!
The G8 KNOW THE FUCKING reasons that anyone with any intelligence now KNOWS is World Genocide: they stone-faced, and stone-walled point-blank refuse to even acknowledge any criticism whatever!
Bush leads, with the TOTAL ILLOGICAL LIE - refuted by such people, as his head of the FEDERAL RESERVE - one of the most HIDE-BOUND REACTIONARY INSTITUTIONS ever foisted on the people by HAMILTONIAN sophistry!
What he is saying is: YES, I am killing the WORLDS' PEOPLES - now just what the fuck are you going to DO about it?
Military World Dictatorship is upon us - countries are being INFORMED of this fact, by GBG, & GENOA; places like Argentina, & Papua New Guinea, already knew!
Everything the G8 says is a lie: Their "science" is a lie; their "economics" is a lie; their "Law" is a lie!
"Common Law" Anglo countries are where this world rot started - and who are the "Leaders" in destroying ALL LIFE RIGHTS! Every toxic technology known, now runs rough-shod over these peoples, every people they can access by propaganda fronts, and everyone & everybeing on the planet through environmental destruction - "spearheaded" by the Nuke Militaries, the OIL industry, and the Giant Chemical & BioTech food concerns!
Votes have been tried!
Polls & public opinion have been tried!
Boycotts have been tried!
National Strikes are now being tried!

They do not, and will not listen! Why? They have been terrorized by secret military & police factions!
Now you tell us, Mr. Fucking Blix - calm, unruffled, whore imbecile - what should be the next step?

For proving my point. I bet your idea of a next step would not appeal to a lot of people. Being insulted for having a different idea does not seem so 'new' to me after all.

violence is not good ! but its necessary for the Revolution, only with an Revolution we can stop the multinationals too destroy the earth, the ppl and the animals. the G8 don't listen what the ppl said, they dont care what
they thinking. But only we have enought ppl too demonstrate its usefull ......

Those committing violence have no place within the anti-globalisation movement. The thugs who belive that violence is a valid means to an end have blood on their hands and are in no position to criticise those world leaders who exploit the poor. Why not try using your brain rather than your fists and you might learn something. You have a cheek to claim that the majority of non-violent protestors are uninformed - why don't you look at the devastation caused by violence on the very communities the real non-violent protestors are trying to help.
You are right to say that the media jump on the violence committed by thugs at demonstrations. Thanks to the small minority of troublemakers,the real issues that the real protestors (ie: the non-violent protestors)are trying to raise are obscured by stories of riots and violence. Non-violent protest creates a far more powerful image than random acts of violence - but then that's probably something you're too stupid to appreciate.
I hope that one day you will grow out of this particularly nasty phase in your life and are ashamed of the revolting attitudes you express in your statement.
Perhaps you are trying (in a sick kind of way) to be ironic about this - I certainly hope so.

I agree with your statement as expressed in the first paragraph: commit violence and you are no longer in a position to criticise anyone. Yes, I'm being ironic about it, in my own way which you might not appreciate but clearly don't overwhelm with mindless insults. I DO appreciate that.

You state: "Non-violent protest creates a far more powerful image than random acts of violence - but then that's probably something you're too stupid to appreciate." No, I'm not, not at all: I do agree 100% with that statement. Violence is too easily denounced and kills all arguments. As I've stated here before, a lot of people DO have good arguments. Some people who commit violence actually MIGHT have equally good arguments that are sadly overshadowed by their acts. Don't let your acts stand in the way of your ideas.

My first message was entirely tongue-in-cheek, but unfortunately in line with how many people would see this. There is nothing behind the violence. I hope there is, because if violence is the message as such, I don't see any improvement there.

i think you are both a pig and a brain-washed idiot and violence would be very good if only i could beat the hell out of you i would be the happiest man on earth and i don't need to explane my reasons to an idiot like you to do that
fuck you motherfucker i hope you gonna be ran over by a car

Such behaviour would of course be a nice alternative to a slow death because of environmental decay, wouldn't it? I honestly frightening that someone's opinion can cause so much rage.

Tho I think Blixior's sense of irony is getting him / her quickly misunderstood, and is really not that helpful in serious debate, I appreciate his / her attempts to rationally deal with this subject after his / her initial post.

And instead of just reiterating what I've already posted to Indymedia, I'm just going to give the URL for my post:

http://italy.indymedia.org/front.php?article_id=3684&group=webcast

It is titled "The Problematic Nature of Police Infiltration".

The violence / non-violence debate is something which needs to continue, and without the sectarian and / or agent provacatuer tactics (such as that by Julie Littlefield) of saying one group or another does not "belong" in this movement. We are all seriously struggling in the ways we feel are appropriate, and we should all respect that and try to comes to rerms with one another.

I also invite people to read the document my group has written "(the) mechanics for disrepair: Globalization, Capitalism and Some Idas On What To Do About It", which is at our website: http://www.geocities.com/mechanicsfordisrepair There is much in this article, I think, which could add to this debate.

Blixior:

It is also important to know that while many people do view these protests with some skepticism, I think it would be wrong to say that this is due to the "violence", as such. Keep in mind that the vast majority of people on the planet are not pacifists, that most people accept the notion of fighting when necessary. Thus, I think its more accurate to say that if people view this violence as an issue it is not because they are against violence, per se, but because they don't know if it is necessary.

The reason I bring this up is because after each major protest I have personally gone around and done informal interviews with as many "regular [read: non-activist] people" as I could. I have yet to find anyone who condems the violence outright, tho I have found some who wonder "if its necessary", and some who feel "its about damn time". These two general answers seem to indicate a portion who kinda feel alienated by the violence, and a portion who identify with it.

Because of this I feel it is important to keep ourselves from making huge generalizations such as "violence alienates people" or "people idenitify with violence", which are the arguments of many pacifists and non-pcifists repectively.

Another important aspect of this is to recognize that violence is a generally accepted form of struggle outside of the advanced capitalist countries. This would seem to indicate that non-violence is, in many ways, a priviledged form of struggle. I don't say this to down play non-violent action, but to point out that blanket condemnations of violence could end up being very racist and / or capitalist arguments... especially since many police forces openly work with non-violent and peaceful demonstrators and help plan their demonstrations.

So, as a personal note, I have trouble believing that anything they would let us do really has any effect on them. This is why the only forms of non-violent protest which seem to work are illegal ones (i.e. Seattle, etc.).

Protestors will never be thankful for the violence that occures in these demonstrations. We have truth to speak to the governments of the world, we have a voice and we will never be silenced.
Violence is never a good thing to express but it inevitably comes about because of the anger we have towards the injustice that exists in the world. We cannot fight the violence of Capitalistic greed, econonomic inequality, human rights violations and environmental degredation, with more violence. Violence is not our message, it the message of those who attempt to supress and oppress, using their weak and infantile means of stirring fear is not the way we will create good world.

We do have a message, and it is exists not in empty arguments, nor in the words or actions of any one person, it exists in a vision and passion that all those who participate meaningfully in demonstrations, and activism for the common good of humanity and this planet.
We want an end to the ruthless violence that is being inflicted upon the people and this planet. We may not know how to bring it to an end, but we are learning and walking the talk.
Love, solidarity, and compassion my friend
Cyberfrog

Violence is not good, but I defend myself when I am attacked. (Btw, property destruction is small violence compered to the violence against us, people, workes, are suffering from by the capitalism everyday!) ((pardon my bad english))

I disagree with violence in general but the problem is that it is an undemocratic (and understandable - we used violence against Hitler) reaction to an undemocratic problem.

People talk about free trade, and from an equal footing, a true "free market" might not be such a bad thing. Personally I agree with a more equal form of decentralised socialism, but let's just examine the arguments for true free trade, so I can try to get my point across:

the current status quo, which the G8 want to strengthen, isn't anything to do with true free trade. The world as it stands is the result of hundreds of years of ethnic cleansing. Its the result of the west of europe using force and colonial brutality in some of the worst holocausts which have ever happened, to exterminate teh native americans, the aborigines, the native central and south americans, the blacks in south africa (and a very similar thing now in israel with the palestinians), etc. So I say to Blair and Bush, if you want free trade, first:

reverse the "un free trade" things which have got us into our current situation. And then we can start from the same starting block.

Ie:

Give the americas back to the natives
give australia and new zealand back to teh natives
do something about the inequality in india, africa, and much of asia which is caused to a very great extent by the machinery left by the colonial powers
stop dictating to the rest of the world how to rule their countries

The problem is that at the moment fucking Blair and Bush think that India, Africa, etc are fucked up because they aren't properly capitalist, when in fact they are fucked up because of what our countries have done to them (and america itself is the result of our country going there and using force to oppress the natives.

Of course, I realise that in actuality even if you did redistribute everything the free market would actually lead back to inequality, but I think that the likes of the G8 should think about these things before they start condemning the protestors. The system we live in is entirely dictated by a few powerful nations.

Blxior, if you don't believe me, you should have watched the programme on itv the other day "the new rulers of the world". This was on fucking IT "Daily Mail" V.

This isn't even a free market we live in, its a cunningly disguised fascist dictatorship.

By the way, I have a politics degree. I'm not some trendy teenager who goes out dressed in a mask and combat trousers. I don't throw petrol bombs and I don't throw bricks. I just want the world to be a better place.